Eminent domain (United States), compulsory purchase (United Kingdom, New Zealand, Ireland), resumption/compulsory acquisition (Australia), or expropriation (South Africa and Canada) is an action of the state to seize a citizen's private property, expropriate property, or seize a citizen's rights in property with due monetary compensation, but without the owner's consent. The property is taken either for government use or by delegation to third parties who will devote it to public or civic use or, in some cases, economic development. The most common uses of property taken by eminent domain are for public utilities, highways, and railroads;^{[citation needed]} however, it may also be taken for reasons of public safety, such as in the case of Centralia, Pennsylvania. Some jurisdictions require that the government body offer to purchase the property before resorting to the use of eminent domain.

Meaning[link]

The term "eminent domain" was taken from the legal treatise De Jure Belli et Pacis, written by the Dutch jurist Hugo Grotius in 1625,^[1] which used the term dominium eminens (Latin for supreme lordship) and described the power as follows:

"... The property of subjects is under the eminent domain of the state, so that the state or he who acts for it may use and even alienate and destroy such property, not only in the case of extreme necessity, in which even private persons have a right over the property of others, but for ends of public utility, to which ends those who founded civil society must be supposed to have intended that private ends should give way. But it is to be added that when this is done the state is bound to make good the loss to those who lose their property."

Some U.S. states, including New York and Louisiana, use the term appropriation as a synonym for the exercising of eminent domain powers.

Condemnation[link]

The term "condemnation" is used to describe the formal act of the exercise of the power of eminent domain to transfer title to the property from its private owner to the government. This use of the word should not be confused with its sense of a declaration that property is uninhabitable due to defects. Condemnation via eminent domain indicates the government is taking ownership of the property or some lesser interest in it, such as an easement. After the condemnation action is filed the amount of just compensation is determined. However, in some cases, the property owner challenges the action because the proposed taking is not for "public use", or the condemnor is not legislatively authorized to take the subject property, or has not followed the proper substantive or procedural steps as required by law.

Other property[link]

The exercise of eminent domain is not limited to real property. Governments may also condemn personal property. Governments can even condemn intangible property such as contract rights, patents, trade secrets, and copyrights. Even the taking of professional sports team's franchise has been held by the California Supreme Court to satisfy the "public use" constitutional limitation, although eventually, that taking was not permitted because it was deemed to violate the interstate commerce clause of the U.S. Constitution.^[2]

North America[link]

United States[link]

Constitution[link]

The practice of condemnation was transplanted into the American colonies with the common law. In the early years, unimproved land could be taken without compensation; this practice was accepted because land was so abundant that it could be cheaply replaced. When it came time to draft the United States Constitution, differing views on eminent domain were voiced. Thomas Jefferson favored eliminating all remnants of feudalism, and pushed for allodial ownership.^[3] James Madison, who wrote the Fifth Amendment to the United States Constitution, had a more moderate view, and struck a compromise that sought to at least protect property rights somewhat by explicitly mandating compensation and using the term "public use" rather than "public purpose", "public interest", or "public benefit".^[4]

The Fifth Amendment imposes limitations on the exercise of eminent domain: the taking must be for public use and just compensation must be paid. Some historians have suggested that these limitations on the taking power were inspired by the need to permit the army to secure mounts, fodder and provisions from local ranchers and the perceived need to assure them compensation for such takings. Similarly, soldiers forcibly sought housing in whatever homes were near their military assignments. To address the latter problem, the Third Amendment was enacted in 1791 as part of the US Constitution's Bill of Rights. It provided that the quartering of soldiers on private property could not take place in peacetime without the landowner's consent. It also required that, in wartime, established law had to be followed in housing troops on private property. Presumably, this would mandate "just compensation", a requirement for the exercise of eminent domain in general per the Fifth Amendment.^[5] All US states have legislation specifying eminent domain procedures within their respective territories.^[6]

The power of governments to take private real or personal property has always existed in the United States, being an inherent attribute of sovereignty. This power reposes in the legislative branch of the government and may not be exercised unless the legislature has authorized its use by statutes that specify who may use it and for what purposes. The legislature may delegate the power to private entities like public utilities or railroads, and even to individuals for the purpose of acquiring access to their landlocked land. Its use was limited by the Takings Clause in the Fifth Amendment to the U.S. Constitution in 1791, which reads, "...nor shall private property be taken for public use, without just compensation". The Fifth Amendment did not create the national government's right to use the eminent domain power, it simply limited it to public use.^[7]

The U.S. Supreme Court has consistently deferred to the right of states to make their own determinations of public use, although the reason why the constitutional term "public use" should not be subject to federal judicial interpretation, the same as other constitutional terms, has not been explained. In 1832 the Supreme Court ruled that eminent domain could be used to allow a mill owner to expand his dam and operations by flooding an upstream neighbor. The court opinion stated that a public use does not have to mean public occupation of the land; it can mean a public benefit.^[8] In Clark vs. Nash (1905), the Supreme Court acknowledged that different parts of the country have unique circumstances and the definition of public use thus varied with the facts of the case. It ruled a farmer could expand his irrigation ditch across another farmer's land (with compensation), because that farmer was entitled to "the flow of the waters of the said Fort Canyon Creek... and the uses of the said waters... [is] a public use." Here, in recognizing the arid climate and geography of Utah, the Court indicated the farmer not adjacent to the river had as much right as the farmer who was, to access the waters.^[9] However, until the 14th Amendment was ratified in 1868, the limitations on eminent domain specified in the Fifth Amendment applied only to the federal government and not to the states. That view ended in 1896 when in the Chicago, Burlington & Quincy Railroad v. Chicago case the court held that the eminent domain provisions of the Fifth Amendment were incorporated in the Due Process Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment and thus were now binding on the states, or in other words, when the states take private property they are required to devote it to a public purpose and compensate the property owner for his loss.^[10] This was the beginning of what is now known as the "selective incorporation" doctrine.

An expansive interpretation of eminent domain was reaffirmed in Berman v. Parker (1954), in which the U.S. Supreme Court reviewed an effort by the District of Columbia to take and raze blighted structures, in order to eliminate slums in the Southwest Washington area. After the taking, held the court, the taken and razed land could be transferred to private redevelopers who would construct condominiums, private office buildings and a shopping center. The Supreme Court ruled against the owners of a non-blighted property within the area on the grounds that the project should be judged on its plans as a whole, not on a parcel by parcel basis. In Hawaii Housing Authority v. Midkiff (1984), the Supreme Court approved the use of eminent domain to transfer a land lessor's title to its tenants who owned and occupied homes built on the leased land. The court's justification was to break up a housing oligopoly, and thereby lower or stabilize home prices, although in reality, following the Midkiff decision, home prices on Oahu escalated dramatically, more than doubling within a few years.^{[citation needed]}

The Supreme Court's decision in Kelo v. City of New London, 545 U.S. 469 (2005) affirmed the authority of New London, Connecticut, to take non-blighted private property by eminent domain, and then transfer it for a dollar a year to a private developer solely for the purpose of increasing municipal revenues. This 5-4 decision received heavy press coverage and inspired a public outcry that eminent domain powers were too broad. In reaction to Kelo, several states enacted or are considering state legislation that would further define and restrict the power of eminent domain. The Supreme Courts of Illinois, Michigan (County of Wayne v. Hathcock (2004)), Ohio (Norwood, Ohio v. Horney (2006)), Oklahoma, and South Carolina have recently ruled to disallow such takings under their state constitutions.

The redevelopment in New London, the subject of the Kelo decision, proved to be a failure and as of now (2012 - more than a half-dozen years after the court's decision) nothing has been built on the taken land in spite of the expenditure of over $80 million in public funds. The Pfizer corporation, which would have been the primary beneficiary of the additional development, announced in 2009 that it would close its $300 million New London research facility, shortly before the expiration of its 10-year tax abatement agreement with the city.^[11] The facility was subsequently purchased in 2010 for just $55 million by General Dynamics Electric Boat.^[12]

American libertarians argue that eminent domain is unnecessary. Bruce L. Benson notes that utilities, for instance, have a variety of methods at their disposal, such as option contracts and dummy buyers, to obtain the contiguous parcels of land needed to build pipelines, roads, and so forth. These methods are routinely used to acquire land needed for shopping malls and other large developments.^[13] Walter Block argues that the problem of recalcitrant landowners ("holdouts") who refuse reasonable offers for the sale of their land is solved in the long term by the fact that their failure to accumulate wealth through such trades will give them a relative disadvantage in attempting to accumulate more land. Thus, the vast majority of land will tend to fall into the control of those who are willing to make profitable exchanges.^[14]

Compensation[link]

American courts have held that the preferred measure of "just compensation" is "fair market value", i.e., the price that a willing but unpressured buyer would pay a willing but unpressured seller for the subject property under ordinary circumstances, with both parties fully informed of the property's good and bad features.^[15] Also, this approach takes into account the property's highest and best use (i.e., its most profitable use) which is not necessarily its current use or the use mandated by current zoning if there is a reasonable probability of zone change.

This approach has been severely criticized because it omits from consideration a variety of incidental economic losses that a taking of land inflicts on its owners. The most egregious example of such losses is provided by the American rule that denies any compensation to owners of businesses that are destroyed when land on which they are located is taken, and the business cannot relocate. A small minority of states have provided by statute that at least some business losses are compensable.

Also, attorneys' and appraisers' fees are not recoverable (except in Florida) so the owners of the taken property never recover the full value of the taken land, even if they prevail in the valuation trial, because a part of their recovery must be used to pay those lawyers and appraisers. Some states do provide for limited recovery of such litigation expenses, typically when the owners' recovery substantially exceeds the amount of the condemnor's pretrial offer or the evidence presented by the condemnor at trial by a specified percentage. Also, when a condemnation action is abandoned, the owners are typically entitled (by statute) to be paid reasonable attorneys' and appraisers' fee they had to incur in defending the condemnation action.

When payment of compensation is delayed, the owner of the taken land is entitled to receive interest on the award of compensation, that accrues from the time of taking to the time of payment. The interest must be reasonable, so that when prevailing market rates of interest exceed the statutory rate (as in inflationary times), the former has to be used.

The U.S. Supreme Court takes the position that unlike the determination of what is a "public use," the determination of compensation is a judicial, not legislative, function, but legislatures are free to provide for more liberal awards of compensation than the constitutional minimum determined by courts.

In cases of partial takings of land, the owners are entitled to compensation for the taken part, plus severance damages (the diminution of value of what remains of their property after the taking). If the partial taking creates special benefits (i.e., it causes an increase in the value of the remaining land) their value is offset against compensation, with the majority of states allowing such offsets only against severance damages, so the owner always gets paid for the taken land. When a partial taking impairs access to the remainder land, that gives rise to a contentious issue because courts take the position that diminution in value caused by impaired access is compensable only when the impairment is substantial. Traffic regulations that affect access (one-way streets, median dividers, etc.) are deemed exercises of the police power and are not compensable.

In addition to fee simple titles, all interests in property (easements, leaseholds, etc.) are compensable. The measure of value of a leasehold is the amount by which prevailing comparable rentals in the area exceed the actual contracted-for rent. This amount is known as "bonus value" of a lease. It is calculated over the remaining life of the lease and then reduced to its present value. The measure of compensation for an easement is the difference in the value of the subject land as unencumbered and as encumbered by the easement.

In determining value, zoning and other land-use regulations are considered, but if it appears that there is a reasonable probability of zone change to a higher use, that may be shown and in that case the owner is entitled to an additional increment of value (the extra amount over and above the value under current zoning, that the market would pay for the probability of rezoning).

The appraisal profession recognizes several different methods of calculating value, but courts are largely stuck in the convention of using three valuation approaches: (a) market data analysis or comparable sales value, (b) the capitalization of rentals, and (c) the reproduction-less-depreciation approach under which the cost of reproducing the improvements on the property is estimated and then depreciated to allow for wear and tear and functional or economic obsolescence. The value of the land is then added to the value of the reproduced, depreciated improvements. Some states allow compensation as the cost of reproduction without depreciation, but only in cases where the subject property, though privately owned, performs an important public or charitable function.

The U.S. Supreme Court has indicated (U.S. v. Cors) that it is not its intention to make a "fetish" out of market value as the measure of compensation, and that other approaches may be used when conventional methods do not work, or if applied, would create an injustice (Pewee Coal v. United States). These situations, however, are extremely rare.

Studies in several parts of the country (California, Georgia, Minnesota, New York and Utah) have demonstrated that condemning agencies frequently undercompensate property owners, and that those owners who reject the pre-litigation offers and go to court tend to recover substantially higher awards, whether by judges or juries.

Tax implications[link]

When private property is destroyed, stolen, condemned, or disposed of, the owner may receive a payment in property or money in the form of insurance or a condemnation award.^[16] If property is compulsorily or involuntarily converted into money (as in eminent domain) the proceeds can be reinvested without payment of capital gains tax provided it is reinvested in property similar or related in service or use to the property so converted, no capital gain shall be recognized.^[17]

Bush executive order[link]

On June 23, 2006, the first anniversary of the Kelo decision (see above), President George W. Bush issued Executive Order 13406 which stated in Section I that the federal government must limit its use of taking private property for "public use" with "just compensation", which is also stated in the constitution, for the "purpose of benefiting the general public." The order limits this use by stating that it may not be used "for the purpose of advancing the economic interest of private parties to be given ownership or use of the property taken".^[18] However, eminent domain is more often exercised by local and state governments, albeit often with funds obtained from the federal government.

Canada[link]

In Canada, expropriation is governed by federal or provincial statutes. Under these statutory regimes, public authorities have the right to acquire private property for public purposes, so long as the acquisition is approved by the appropriate government body. Once property is taken, an owner is entitled to "be made whole" by compensation for: the market value of the expropriated property, injurious affection to the remainder of the property (if any), disturbance damages, business loss, and special difficulty relocating. Owners can advance claims for compensation above that initially provided by the expropriating authority by bringing a claim before the court or an administrative body appointed by the governing legislation.

Europe[link]

In many European nations, the European Convention on Human Rights provides protection from appropriation of private property by the state. Article 8 of the Convention provides that "Everyone has the right to respect for his private and family life, his home, and his correspondence" and prohibits interference with this right by the state, unless the interference is in accordance with law and necessary in the interests of national security, public safety, economic well-being of the country, prevention of disorder or crime, protection of health or morals, or protection of the rights and freedoms of others. This right is expanded by Article 1 of the First Protocol to the Convention, which states that "Every natural person or legal person is entitled to the peaceful enjoyment of his possessions.". Again, this is subject to exceptions where state deprivation of private possessions is in the general or public interest, is in accordance with law, and, in particular, to secure payment of taxes. Settled case-law of ECHR provides that just compensation has to be paid in cases of expropriation.^[19]

France[link]

In France, the Declaration of the Rights of Man and of the Citizen similarly mandates just and preliminary compensation before expropriation; and a Déclaration d'utilité publique is commonly required, to demonstrate a public benefit.

Notably, in 1945, by decree of General Charles de Gaulle based on the untried^[20] accusations of collaboration, the Renault company was expropriated from Louis Renault posthumously and nationalised as Régie Nationale des Usines Renault ^[20] — without compensation.^[21]

United Kingdom[link]

After his victory in 1066, William the Conqueror seized virtually all land in England. Although he maintained absolute power over the land, he granted fiefs to landholders who served as stewards, paying fees and providing military services. During the Hundred Years War in the 14th century, Edward III used the Crown's right of purveyance for massive expropriations. Chapter 28 of the Magna Carta required that immediate cash payment be made for expropriations. As the king's power was broken down in the ensuing centuries, tenants were regarded as holding ownership rights rather than merely possessory rights over their land. In 1427, a statute was passed granting commissioners of sewers in Lincolnshire the power to take land without compensation. After the early 16th century, however, Parliamentary takings of land for roads, bridges, etc. generally did require compensation. The common practice was to pay 10 per cent more than the assessed value. However, as the voting franchise was expanded to include more non-landowners, the bonus was eliminated.

Allodial title is the title to land generally held in fee simple by an individual or group that is sovereign on that land. Thus, in English law, only the monarch holds allodial title. All others are tenants of the sovereign through their feudal vassalages. Sovereigns generally gain allodial title either by grant of another sovereign to such title, or through right of conquest.

In England and Wales, and other jurisdictions that follow the principles of English law, the related term compulsory purchase is used. The landowner is compensated with a price agreed or stipulated by an appropriate person. Where agreement on price cannot be achieved, the value of the taken land is determined by the Lands Tribunal, a court consisting of one barrister and two chartered surveyors. The operative law is a patchwork of statutes and case law. The principal Acts are the Lands Clauses Consolidation Act 1845, the Land Compensation Act 1961, the Compulsory Purchase Act 1965, the Land Compensation Act 1973, the Acquisition of Land Act 1981, part IX of the Town and Country Planning Act 1990, the Planning and Compensation Act 1991, and the Planning and Compulsory Purchase Act 2004.

Germany[link]

This unreferenced section requires citations to ensure verifiability.

The Basic Law for the Federal Republic of Germany states in its Article 14 (3) the "an expropriation is only allowed for the public good" and just compensation must be made. It also provides for the right to have the amount of the compensation checked by a court.

Italy[link]

This unreferenced section requires citations to ensure verifiability.

Esproprio, or more formally espropriazione per pubblica utilità (literally "expropriation for public utility") in Italy takes place within the frame of civil law. The law regulating expropriation is the D.P.R. n.327 of 2001,^[22] amended by D.Lgs. n.302 of 2002;^[23] it supersedes the old expropriation law, the Royal Decree n.2359 of 1865. Also other national and regional laws may apply. The general provisions for the expropriation stem from article 42 of the Italian Constitution and article 834 of the Codice Civile. Expropriation can be total (the whole property is expropriated) or partial; permanent or temporary.

Nazionalizzazione ("nationalization"), instead, is provided for by article 43 of the Constitution; it transfers to governmental authority and property a whole industrial sector, if it is deemed to be a natural or de facto monopoly, and an essential service of public utility. The most famous nationalization in Italy was the 1962 nationalization of the electrical power sector.

Australia[link]

In Australia, section 51(xxxi) of the Australian Constitution permits the Commonwealth Parliament to make laws with respect to "the acquisition of property on just terms from any State or person for any purpose in respect of which the Parliament has power to make laws."^[24] This has been construed meaning that just compensation may not always include monetary or proprietary recompense, rather it is for the court to determine what is just. It may be necessary to imply a need for compensation in the interests of justice, lest the law be invalidated.^[25]

Property subject to resumption is not restricted to real estate as authority from the Federal Court has extended the states' power to resume property to any form of physical property.^{[citation needed]} For the purposes of section 51(xxxi), money is not property which may be compulsorily acquired.^{[citation needed]}. A statutory right to sue has been considered "property" under this section.^[26]

The Commonwealth must also derive some benefit from the property acquired, that is, the Commonwealth can "only legislate for the acquisition of Property for particular purposes".^[27] Accordingly, the power does not extend to allow legislation designed merely to seek to extinguish the previous owner's title.^[28] The states and territories' powers of resumption on the other hand are not so limited. The section 43(1) of the Lands Acquisition Act 1998 (NT) grants the Minister the power to acquire land 'for any purpose whatever'.^[29] The High Court of Australia interpreted this provision literally, relieving the Territory government of any public purpose limitation on the power.^[30] This finding permitted the Territory government to acquire land subject to Native Title, effectively extinguishing the Native Title interest in the land. As noted by Kirby J in dissent and a number of commentators, this represents a missed opportunity to comment on the exceptional nature of powers of resumption exercised in the absence of a public purpose limitation.^[31]

The term resumption is a reflection of the fact that, as a matter of Australian law, all land was originally owned by the Crown before it was sold, leased or granted ^[32] and that, through the act of compulsory acquisition, the Crown is "resuming" possession.

South America[link]

Chile[link]

Art. 19, Nº 24, of the Chilean Constitution establishes that, "No one, in any case, can be deprived of its ownership, the property of such ownership or any of the essential attributes or faculties of the ownership, except by a general or special law that authorizes the expropriation by the cause of public utility or national interest, as qualified by the legislator. The expropriated will be able to claim over the legality of the expropriatorial act before regular Courts and will always have the right to an indemnification for the patrimonial damage effectively caused, which will be established by an amiable agreement o by a sentence handed down according to law for said Courts."

The vast majority of expropriated owners accept the amount of the indemnification, which usually is in line with real estate market values.^{[citation needed]}

Asia[link]

India[link]

The Constitution originally provided for the right to property under Articles 19 and 31. Article 19 guaranteed to all citizens the right to 'acquire, hold and dispose of property'. Article 31 provided that "No person shall be deprived of his property save by authority of law." It also provided that compensation would be paid to a person whose property had been 'taken possession of or acquired' for public purposes. In addition, both the state government as well as the union (federal) government were empowered to enact laws for the "acquisition or requisition of property" (Schedule VII, Entry 42, List III). It is this provision that has been interpreted as being the source of the state's 'eminent domain' powers.^[33]

The provisions relating to the right to property were changed a number of times. The 44th amendment act of 1978 deleted the right to property from the list of Fundamental Rights.^[34] A new article, Article 300-A, was added to the constitution which provided that "no person shall be deprived of his property save by authority of law". Thus, if a legislature makes a law depriving a person of his property, there would be no obligation on the part of the State to pay anything as compensation. The aggrieved person shall have no right to move the court under Article 32. Thus, the right to property is no longer a fundamental right, though it is still a constitutional right. If the government appears to have acted unfairly, the action can be challenged in a court of law by citizens.^[35]

The liberalisation of the economy and the Government's initiative to set up special economic zones have led to many protests by farmers and have opened up a debate on the reinstatement of the fundamental right to private property.^[36]

Pakistan[link]

Under the Land Acquisition Act, 1894, the government has the power to compulsorily acquire private land at the prevailing market rate for public purposes such as roads, highways, railways, dams, airports, etc.

People's Republic of China[link]

Other countries[link]

Many countries recognize eminent domain to a much lesser extent than the English-speaking world or do not recognize it at all. Japan, for instance, has very weak eminent domain powers, as evidenced by the high-profile opposition to the expansion of Narita International Airport, and the disproportionately large amounts of financial inducement given to residents on sites slated for redevelopment in return for their agreement to leave, one well-known recent case being that of Roppongi Hills.

There are other countries such as the People's Republic of China that practice eminent domain whenever it is convenient to make space for new communities and government structures. Singapore practices eminent domain under the Land Acquisitions Act which allows it to carry out its Selective En bloc Redevelopment Scheme for urban renewal. The Amendments to the Land Titles Act allowed property to be purchased for purposes of urban renewal against an owner sharing a collective title if the majority of the other owners wishes to sell and the minority did not. Thus, eminent domain often invokes concerns of majoritarianism.

Since the 1990s, the Zimbabwean government under Robert Mugabe has seized a great deal of land and homes of mainly white farmers in the course of the land reform movement in Zimbabwe. The government argued that such land reform was necessary to redistribute the land to Zimbabweans dispossessed of their lands during colonialism.^[37]

Examples[link]

• Controversy on the Delaware: A Look Upstream at the Tocks Island Dam Project
• United States v. Carmack
• United States v. Gettysburg Electric Railway Company 160 U.S. 668 (1896)
• Berman v. Parker, 348 U.S. 26 (1954)
• Hawaii Housing Authority v. Midkiff, 467 U.S. 229 (1984)
• Norwood, Ohio v. Horney
• Kelo v. City of New London

In popular culture[link]

As a controversial issue, compulsory acquisition has been a feature of movies and other pieces of fiction for many years.

Instances of compulsory acquisition in literature and films include The Hitchhiker's Guide to the Galaxy, where first Arthur Dent's home is acquired for the building of a bypass road and then the Earth is acquired (demolished) to make way for a hyperspace bypass; and The Castle, an Australian film, where the Kerrigans' home is sought to be acquired to allow for an airport extension.

In Stephen King's novel Roadwork, published in 1981, the protagonist's house is purchased to make way for a road extension.

See also[link]

• Public use
• Navigable servitude
• Water law
• Land bonds

References[link]

Further reading[link]

• Dana Berliner, Opening the Floodgates; Eminent Domain Abuse in a Post-Kelo World, Institute for Justice, June 2006. Available online [1].
• California Eminent Domain Report, Nossaman LLP, Launched October 2009 continuously updated. Available online [2]
• Redevelopment Wrecks; 20 Failed Projects Involving Eminent Domain Abuse, Institute for Justice, June 2006. Available online [3].
• Myths and Realities of Eminent Domain Abuse, Institute for Justice, June 2006. Available online [4].
• Steven Greenhut, Abuse Of Power: How The Government Misuses Eminent Domain, Seven Locks Press, June, 2004, trade paperback, 312 pages, ISBN 1-931643-37-7
• Joshua U. Galperin, A Warning To States, Accepting this Invitation May be Hazardous to Your Health (Safety and Public Welfare): An Analysis of Post-Kelo Legislative Activity. 31 Vermont Law Review 663 (2007).
• Aaron Pirnack, So Long, and Thanks for Playing: Small Business Fair Compensation and Eminent Domain
• Dana Berliner, Public Power, Private Gain, Institute for Justice, April 2003. Available online [5].
• A.J. Hazarabedian, California Eminent Domain Handbook, California Eminent Domain Law Group, June 2005. Available free online [6].
• John Ryskamp, The Eminent Domain Revolt: Changing Perceptions in a New Constitutional Epoch, New York: Algora Publishing, 2006.
• Just Compensation, A Monthly Report on Condemnation Cases, Gideon Kanner, Editor, Published monthly since 1957.
• Property Owners' Rights Handbook: Your Rights and Remedies Under the Eminent Domain Law, Sullivan, Workman & Dee, LLP, 2005. Available online [7].
• Bulldozed: 'Kelo,' Emiment Domain and the American Lust for Land, Carla T. Main, Encounter Books, August 2007.
• NCSL: Eminent Domain. Available online [8]
• NCSL: State Case Law Prohibiting Eminent Domain for Economic Development, August 2005. Available online [9]
• New Jersey Eminent Domain Law [10]
• Blog, www.Gideonstrumpet.info

Beverley Knight MBE
Beverley Knight in 2011
Background information
Birth name	Beverley Anne Smith
Born	(1973-03-22) 22 March 1973 (age 39) Wolverhampton, England
Genres	Soul, R&B, pop rock
Occupations	Singer, songwriter, record producer
Instruments	Vocals, piano
Years active	1994–present
Labels	Dome (1994–1997) Parlophone (1997–2008) Hurricane Records (own label) (2008-present)
Website	www.beverleyknight.com

Beverley Knight MBE (born 22 March 1973) is an English singer, songwriter, and record producer who released her debut album in 1995. Heavily influenced by soul greats such as Sam Cooke and Aretha Franklin, Knight has released six studio albums to date. Widely labelled as one of Britain's greatest soul singers,^[1] Knight is best known for her hit singles "Greatest Day", "Get Up!", "Shoulda Woulda Coulda" and "Come as You Are".

In 2006, Knight solidified her transmission into the mainstream by starring in BBC One music TV show, Just the Two of Us, a role she reprised in 2007. After releasing a platinum-selling compilation album in 2006, Knight went on to tour the UK with a reformed Take That. She has also hosted four series of the [[BBC Radio 2] show Beverley's Gospel Nights, which explores the origins and impact of gospel music. To date the show has run for four seasons and has featured interviews with stars such as Destiny's Child and Shirley Caesar.

Knight is an ambassador for many charities such as Christian Aid and has travelled to areas affected by disease and poverty to help raise awareness. She is an active campaigner for anti-Aids organisations such as the Stop AIDS Campaign and The Terrence Higgins Trust and is also a vocal campaigner against homophobic lyrics in urban music. On Saturday 15 August 2009 she performed live at the 4th annual UK Black Pride event in Regents Park.

On Friday 4 December 2009, at the invitation of Sarah Brown, wife of Prime Minister, Knight performed two songs "Shoulda Woulda Coulda" and "Gold" to an invited audience at 10 Downing Street in support of the White Ribbon Alliance for Safe Motherhood Million Mums charity.

After more than a decade in the industry, Knight was made an MBE by Queen Elizabeth II in February 2007 in recognition of her charitable work and the contribution she has made to British music. In September 2005, Knight was made an honorary Doctor of Music from the University of Wolverhampton.^[2] After receiving a host of awards, including three MOBO Awards, Knight was presented with a Lifetime Achievement Award in 2004 at the Urban Music Awards in London.^[3]

In 1997 Knight was voted number 58 in the 100 Great Black Britons poll.

Biography[link]

1973–1993: Childhood[link]

Knight attended Woodfield Infant and Junior Schools^[4] and Highfields School in Wolverhampton. Knight was born to Jamaican parents, and she grew up in a strict Pentecostal household where church attendance was commonplace. It is here where she began her singing career: "The first time I heard music would have been in church. My mum was often called upon: 'Come on sister Dolores. Lead us in song!' Singing was the most natural thing in the world. I thought, doesn't everybody's mum lead the congregation at church in song?"^[5] Knight continued singing in her local church throughout her childhood, and her musical education was continued at home where she was often exposed to gospel music. Due to her parents' religious beliefs, secular music was largely frowned upon, but artists such as Sam Cooke and Aretha Franklin played a big part in her childhood.^[5]

Knight began writing her own songs – with varying degrees of success – at the age of thirteen. It was not until she turned seventeen, though, that she began to take her craft seriously. Knight began performing the songs that she had written on stage in local clubs in her hometown. At the age of nineteen, she was heard singing at a local nightclub by a record company executive and was offered a recording contract. She was adamant that her education should come first and that she should have something to fall back on, and so went to Cheltenham and Gloucester College of Higher Education to study Religious Theology and Philosophy.^[6] In 2011, she did an interview with Stoke-on-Trent's local radio station, 6 Towns Radio station where she talked about her newest album. ^[7]

1994–2000: Early success[link]

In late 1994, Knight signed a record deal with Dome Records, a small, independent label. Shortly after, she went in studio to write and record her debut album. The backbone of the project was produced by London production trio 2B3, with additional beats provided by Don E (Knight’s cousin), Ethnic Boyz and hip-hop act Blak Twang. Also Klarmann/Weber the German songwriter/producer team (Chaka Khan, Randy Crawford) contributed two songs. The result was the album The B-Funk – hailed as "the best British soul album ever"^[8] by critics when it was released in November 1995. Knight went on to win two Black Music Awards in 1996 ("Best R&B Artist" and "Best Producer" for 2B3) and was named Best R&B Act by Blues and Soul magazine, beating a host of American stars. However, the commercial success of the album failed to match its critical success and the album peaked on the UK album chart at number one-hundred-and-forty-five. Several singles were released from the project, the biggest being "Flavour of the Old School", which peaked at number thirty-three in March 1996 when it was re-released.

In February 1997, Knight left Dome Records after disagreements, and signed a new four-album deal with EMI-controlled Parlophone. After returning to the studio with 2B3 and Don E and teaming up with new producers Dodge and Carl McIntosh, Knight released her second album Prodigal Sista in August 1998. Peaking at number forty-two in Britain, the commercial success of the album proved to be much greater than her debut. The album went on to sell 150,000 copies in Britain^[9] and be certified Gold in 1999.^[10] It contained five top forty hits – the biggest of which were "Greatest Day", peaking at number fourteen, and "Made It Back 99" featuring US rap star Redman, which peaked at number nineteen.

The commercial success of Prodigal Sista marked a big step forward in Knight's career and was reflected in the widespread critical acclaim of the project. Q magazine called the album "a triumph not only of Knight's musical vision but also of the strength in her character" while The Times remarked "Prodigal Sista is a joy to hear – her vocal and intricate self-devised and performed harmonies can make you catch your breath in wonderment". Labelled as one of the greatest British soul albums of all time, the album won three MOBO (Music Of Black Origin) Awards with "Made It Back" and "Greatest Day" winning Best R&B Act in 1998 and 1999 respectively, and Prodigal Sista winning the Best Album Award.^[11]

2001–2005: Mainstream breakthrough[link]

Throughout 2001 Knight returned to the recording studio to write and record her third studio album. She was accompanied by a different array of writers and producers handpicked largely by Kevin and Bev from Britain and the United States, which included James Poyser, Che Guevara, Derrick Joshua & Derrick Martin, D'Influence, Mike Spencer and Colin Emmanuael. The result was Who I Am, which was released in March 2002. It was preceded by two singles, "Get Up!" and "Shoulda Woulda Coulda" which was a first in that it introduced Knight to the world of Nashville and one of its most famous son's Craig Wiseman a giant in the country music business. This partnership became Knight’s most successful single up to that point, peaking at number ten on the UK singles chart. The success of the singles, together with wide critical praise, propelled the album to number seven on the album chart making Who I Am her most commercially successful album to date. It was re-released with new versions of the singles "Gold" and "Shape of You (Reshaped)" and has sold 215,000 copies in Britain,^[9] earning it a Gold sales certificate.^[12]

The critical response to Who I Am was largely positive, with The Guardian stating "every song bubbles with the kind of expensive, polished confidence that often eludes British contenders, and she sings with the poise of an artist at the height of her powers"^[13] whilst the BBC remarked "Who I Am marks a significant change in direction for this tenacious 28-year-old singer, signifying her own personal growth as a true artist and developing songwriter....on this her most personal work to date, she takes us on an intimate journey where she bares her soul with such raw honesty that you get the distinct impression a healing process is taking place".^[14] Although the album failed to match the widespread and unanimous acclaim of Knight’s first two albums, it still earned her two Brit Award nominations ("Best Female", "Best Urban Act")^[15] and the album was nominated for the Mercury Music Prize in 2002.^[16]

After touring Britain in 2002, Knight set about creating her fourth album and entered the studio in the summer of 2003. Without the architect of her most successful song in her camp her new A&R team attempted to appeal to a larger mainstream audience, they enlisted the help of pop producers such as Guy Chambers and Peter-John Vettese as well as collaborating with R&B producers such as DJ Munro. The result was Affirmation, which was released on Parlophone in June 2004. The album entered the charts at number eleven and was preceded by the single "Come as You Are" – a rock/pop orientated song written with and produced by Chambers. The song marked a more mainstream pop sound that alienated Knight’s largely urban fan base and the song was not well received by urban radio stations. Nevertheless it became her biggest hit to date, peaking at number nine on the singles chart. The song was followed by two more singles, "Not Too Late for Love" and "Keep This Fire Burning", which helped boost album sales and resulted in the album being awarded a Gold sales certificate in December 2004.^[17]

The themes running throughout the album, which were influenced by the events she had witnessed over the previous two years, marked a milestone in Knight's career as a lyricist. The main essence of the project was centred on Knight’s relationship with Tyrone Jamison – a gay man whom she described as her "soul mate" and who died of an AIDS-related disease in 2003. Throughout the album, lyrics on tracks such as "Remember Me" ("One day we will be reunited, least I hope that is our destiny, so while you chill in the arms of angels, remember me, remember me") and "No One Ever Loves In Vain" clearly point to her close relationship with Tyrone and rank as her most personal work to date.

Compared to the praise of her previous albums, the critical response to Affirmation was mixed. The mainstream press such as The Guardian praised her for branching out, whilst the black music press such as The Voice and Blues and Soul accused Knight of selling out and being manipulated away from urban music by her record label, a claim she flatly denies: "Everything I've done musically has been completely me. I write my own songs so I'm not just a vocalist who can easily be dictated to."^[18]

2006–2008: Consolidating success[link]

In February 2006 Knight consolidated her move into the mainstream audience by appearing on BBC1 music show, Just the Two of Us. The show, featuring celebrities who duet with established singers, ran for two weeks and proved to be a relative disappointment in terms of audience figures – averaging between fifteen and twenty-five percent audience shares.^[19] Nevertheless it provided a platform for Knight to reach out to a bigger audience and demonstrate her talent by performing a different array of songs than she would otherwise be known for. Reaching out to new audiences was also a driving force behind Knight’s decision to join Take That on their reunion arena tour. Take That - The Ultimate Tour 06, which ran from April to July 2006, sold 270,000 tickets in less than four hours on sale at the box office and featured Knight as a support act.^[20]

In March 2006 Knight released her fifth album, a compilation set featuring the majority of her top forty UK singles entitled Voice – The Best of Beverley Knight. The album, which was certified Gold less than a month after its release,^[21] became her second highest charting of her career when it entered the UK albums chart at number ten and rose to number nine a month later. It was preceded by the single "Piece of My Heart" – a cover of the Erma Franklin classic made famous by Janis Joplin and entered the singles chart at number sixteen, spending eleven weeks inside the UK top 75 singles chart and becoming her longest-running chart single to date.

In October 2006, Knight recorded her fifth studio album, Music City Soul, in Nashville. Completed in less than five days, the album was released on 7 May 2007 and features collaborations with musicians such as Ronnie Wood and Scotty Moore. It spawned three singles, "No Man's Land", released on 16 April 2007, "After You", released on 2 July 2007 and "The Queen of Starting Over", released on 15 October 2007. This turned out to be her final album for Parlophone.

[edit] 2009: Going independent and 100%

On 23 March 2009 Knight announced via her official web site that she had left Parlophone records after eleven years and would be releasing new material through her own label, Hurricane Records. Knight also announced that her sixth studio album would be released in summer 2009, having a more contemporary feel in comparison to previous retro soul album Music City Soul. New songwriters and producers associated with the project include Jimmy Jam and Terry Lewis, (whose previous credits include Janet Jackson, Usher and Mariah Carey) and The Rural along with previous collaborators Guy Chambers and DJ Munro.^[22]

On 31 March 2009 Knight confirmed that she would be releasing her sixth studio album in September through her own record label, Hurricane Records. In a video blog on her website she said that "for the past year, I've been writing for the record. I've been working with some new names and some old names for the album." She also confirmed that she is expecting to go on tour in support of the album later this year.

The album is titled 100%. The first finished track revealed from the album was Knight's collaboration with US producers Jimmy Jam and Terry Lewis, titled "Every Step". The lead single from the album was "Beautiful Night", co-written with Amanda Ghost and produced by The Rural. The album was released the same week on 7 September 2009 and entered the UK Albums Chart at number 17. The second single "In Your Shoes" premiered on BBC 1Xtra on 5 October. The radio remix features UK rapper Chipmunk.

In 2010, Knight made six guest appearances as a panellist on ITVs flagship show Loose Women.

2011: Seventh studio album "Soul UK"[link]

Knight announced in early 2011 that she would be releasing a new album in 2011. She then announced on Twitter and YouTube in March 2011 that the album would be a collection of British Soul covers, she also confirmed that the album would be released in Summer 2011.

In March Knight also announced (via her official mailing list) a one-off gig to be held at the Porchester Hall, London to record a live DVD which will be included in the album's release. She also confirmed that the album would be released on 27 June (later changed to 4 July). Whilst performing the one-off gig at the Porchester Hall, Knight confirmed the album would be titled Soul UK. The first single to be released from the album will be "Mama Used to Say", a hit single originally recorded by Junior Giscombe. The single will be released on 27 June. Other artists whose songs are covered on Soul UK include: Soul II Soul; Loose Ends; Omar;^{[disambiguation needed ]} Jamiroquai; George Michael; Princess; Lewis Taylor; Heatwave; and Jaki Graham.^[23]

Creativity and influences[link]

Growing up in a Pentecostal environment of Jamaican descent, music – especially gospel music – became a staple part of Knight’s childhood. She entered the gospel choir of her local church at the age of just four years old and eventually became the musical director before she left in her late teens. Her musical education continued at home where her family would often sing together around the piano and listen to music from their favourite gospel and soul artists such as Sam Cooke. In 2005, Knight revisited her childhood when she hosted Beverley’s Gospel Nights, a BBC Radio 2 series exploring gospel music. Featuring interviews with artists such as Shirley Caesar, Percy Sledge and Destiny's Child stars Kelly Rowland and Michelle Williams, the six-part series explored the roots of gospel music and the impact it had upon the black community. Such was the success of the show that a second six-part series was commissioned and began in March 2006 and featured new interviews with artists such as Candi Staton, David McAlmont and Marvin Winans. Knight's interview technique and her ability to get her guests to open up and discuss issues in their personal lives such as domestic violence and depression received favourable reviews and led the Radio Times to comment "Knight's passion for the music is obvious - but so is her warmth, which makes her a rarity among interviewers."^[24]

The first artist to make an impact upon Knight was one of the true founders of contemporary gospel and soul music, Sam Cooke. Despite his untimely death in 1964, his music endured and became a staple part of Knight's childhood:

Indeed the impact of Cooke can be seen throughout Knight’s career as she has often performed and recorded Cooke classics, the most notable of which is "A Change Is Gonna Come". The track, which came to exemplify the civil rights movement in the 1960s, has featured in many of Knight's live performances (usually with the aid of the London Community Gospel Choir) and she even recorded a studio version with musician Jools Holland, which featured on his Small World, Big Band Volume 2 album.

In addition to Cooke, another major influence in Knight’s childhood was Aretha Franklin. Besides leading a tribute to Franklin at the BBC's Music of the Millennium concert in 1999, Knight has recorded several of Franklin's tracks, most notably "Do Right Woman, Do Right Man" and "Think", both of which were released as B-sides on Knight's singles "Rewind (Find a Way)" and "Made It Back 99" respectively. It was Franklin's vocal delivery that has most had an impact upon Knight:

Knight has also recorded songs from of other artists such as Stevie Wonder ("Love's in Need of Love Today", which featured on the Warchild album Hope) and Curtis Mayfield ("Hard Times", which appeared on Courtney Pine’s Back in the Day album). But this influence has also manifested itself on stage where Knight often incorporates songs by her heroines such as Nina Simone ("Feelin’ Good"), Chaka Khan ("I Feel For You" and "Sweet Thing") and Billie Holiday ("God Bless the Child") into her live performances.

In addition to the pioneering soul and gospel artists of the mid-twentieth century, modern artists such as Mary J. Blige and D'Angelo have also played a role in shaping Knight’s musical outlook. The most significant of her contemporary peers comes in the form of Prince, a man she describes as one of her heroes: "Prince goes back to me listening to preachers when I was a child, who tell a story to illustrate a point...the first song I heard by him was "Little Red Corvette", when I was nine. Of course, I didn't have a clue about what he was singing about; the sexuality is implicit and I love that."^[26] The influence of Prince, whom Knight even mentions on her Prodigal Sista and Who I Am album sleeves, can be seen throughout her back catalogue with songs such as "Get Up!", "Hurricane Jane" and "Supersonic" being compared to Prince due to their mix of funk and soul.

Throughout her childhood, Knight’s musical exposure developed as she got older. Gospel led to soul, which led to funk which led to R&B^[27] – but growing up in the Midlands meant that she was exposed to lots of other different influences too: "It wasn’t a case that there was a huge black community who all stuck together and only listened to reggae or R&B or strictly black music. I find that London is a bit more segregated. In Wolverhampton, black people weren't so segregated and I think that had a massive impact on my musical influences."^[18] This diversity is illustrated best by Knight's fourth studio album, Affirmation. After working with Guy Chambers, the album had a more mainstream flavour compared to her previous albums and was led by the rock guitar driven single "Come as You Are". Although the song became her highest charting single to date, Knight was largely criticised by urban radio and media for moving too far away from her urban sound. Nevertheless the song illustrated Knight’s determined effort not to become boxed in and "ghettoised".

Achievements[link]

Accolades[link]

In 2006 it was announced that Knight was to be awarded an MBE in acknowledgement for her services to music and the work she does on behalf of several charities. She was presented with the accolade by Queen Elizabeth II at a ceremony at Buckingham Palace in February 2007. After the ceremony Knight remarked that the recognition "reflects not only on my whole career but the work I do for charities which is immensely important to me. I do not do that to be awarded for it, I just do it because it's in my heart, but to be recognised for it, hopefully will put the magnifying glass on to them as well".^[28]

In September 2005 Knight was presented with an honorary degree from the University of Wolverhampton "in recognition of her outstanding contribution to music and the local community, and in recognition of her extensive charity work."^[2] Upon being made a Doctor of Music, she stated she was proud to be black, female, and British, adding: "it is still all me, I have not forgotten my roots."^[29]

On 7 January 2010 Knight won an edition of the BBC's television quiz series Celebrity Mastermind, answering questions on 'The Life and Times of Prince'. Knight's chosen charity for the show was the Terrence Higgins Trust.^[30][31]

Awards and nominations[link]

Discography[link]

Tours[link]

• 2002 - Who I Am Tour
• 2002 - Beverley Knight Tour
• 2005 - Affirmation Tour
• 2006 - Voice – The Best of Tour
• 2007 - Music City Soul Tour
• 2009-10 - 100% Tour
• 2011 - Soul UK Tour

Personal life[link]

Beverley Knight is a keen supporter of home city football club Wolverhampton Wanderers. It had emerged in 2010 that Knight had got engaged to her boyfriend, James O'Keefe.^[32] On 30 June 2011, Knight performed at Abigail Clancy and Peter Crouch's wedding.^[33]

Further reading[link]

• "Queen B" An in-depth interview with Knight by Pete Lewis, featured in July 2009 in Blues & Soul. Knight discusses her forthcoming album '100%', the launch of her new cosmetics range 'K By Beverley Knight', and the UK female soul movement
• "Knight on the town" An interview with Knight by Andrew Losowsky, published in December 2002 and featured in The Big Issue. The interview touches on Knight's career, religion, morality and global poverty
• "Beverley Knight: The soul survivor" In depth article written by Knight detailing her close relationship with friend Tyrone Jamison, who died of an AIDS-related illness in 2003. The article, featured in The Independent newspaper, was published on 20 June 2004
• "Beverley Knight's Band Aid view" An interview with conducted by the BBC in November 2004, where Knight discusses Live Aid and her participation in the re-recording of Band Aid's Do They Know It's Christmas?
• "We're Jammin': Beverley Knight" An interview with Knight conducted by Pascal Wyse for The Guardian newspaper and published on 17 March 2006. The interview features in depth disccussions about Knight's musical education and the artists that have shaped her outlook.

References[link]

^ Please note: subcription needed to validate source but full copy of article can be found here

External links[link]

• Official Site

Miles Kane
Kane perfoming at the Hoxton Square Bar & Kitchen in 2011
Background information
Birth name	Miles Kane
Born	(1986-03-17) 17 March 1986 (age 26) The Wirral, Merseyside, England
Genres	Indie rock, garage rock, Britpop, psychedelic rock, baroque pop, post-punk revival
Occupations	Musician, songwriter
Instruments	Guitar, vocals
Years active	2004–Present
Labels	Columbia Records UK (Solo Career) Domino (Last Shadow Puppets)
Associated acts	The Little Flames, The Rascals, The Last Shadow Puppets, Arctic Monkeys, Alex Turner, Eugene McGuinness
Website	mileskane.com
Notable instruments
Gibson ES Fender Jaguar Fender Telecaster Gibson J-45

Miles Kane (born 17 March 1986) is an English musician originally from Meols on the Wirral, best known as the co-frontman of The Last Shadow Puppets and former frontman of The Rascals. He was formerly the vocalist and lead guitarist for The Rascals, but announced the band's break-up in August 2009. ^[1]

He is currently pursuing a solo career, and continues to be a part of his side-project The Last Shadow Puppets. His debut solo album, Colour of the Trap, was released on 9 May 2011.

The Little Flames[link]

Aged 18, Kane joined The Little Flames later in 2008 as guitarist alongside Eva Petersen (Vocals), Greg Mighall (Drums), Joe Edwards (Bass) and Matt Gregory (Guitar) in December 2004. The band went on to be vaguely successful, achieving comparisons to The Coral and high profile fans such as the Arctic Monkeys. They also went on to tour with bands like The Coral, The Zutons, The Dead 60s and Arctic Monkeys. However, the band decided to go their separate ways.

The Rascals[link]

Kane, on vocals and lead guitar, was joined by Greg Mighall on drums and Joe Edwards on bass guitar and occasional backing vocals. Kane took on the main songwriting duties for the band. The band, who have known each other from childhood, continued where The Little Flames left off; they signed with Deltasonic Records again, only with fewer members this time. They were adamant to keep their own distinct sound of 'awesome rockin beats' with a 'psychedelic quirk' and a 'compelling and unique dark underlying spirit'¹. They released their debut EP in December 2007, just 7 months after they got together. Entitled Out of Dreams it featured 4 tracks, but did not achieve chart success. Yet they soon became tipped to be one of the bands of 2008, championed in particular by NME, following a well received support slot on Arctic Monkeys' 2007 tour. Their first album 'Rascalize' was released on 23 June 2008. The Rascals have a small role in the film Awaydays playing an Echo & the Bunnymen cover. Miles also has several lines such as "Sorry, I have to help the guys with the gear."

The Last Shadow Puppets[link]

Whilst touring with the Arctic Monkeys, Kane developed a strong friendship with front man Alex Turner. They shared a love of the same musical influences, such as Nick Cave. The pair began to play together backstage, and soon began writing new tracks. They realized that there was a future in their songwriting partnership, and the Last Shadow Puppets were born.

The duo decided to travel to the West Coast of France with producer James Ford where they recorded their debut album The Age of the Understatement in just two weeks. Their album went straight to number 1 in the UK Album Charts with the single of the same name reaching number 1 in the Indie Single Charts, and subsequent singles also reaching high spots. They first played together live in the UK, doing a secret set at Glastonbury with a special guest appearance from Jack White, whom Kane lent his iPod to so White could learn the solo. The band's album narrowly missed out on the Nationwide Mercury Music Prize, but thus far they have won the Mojo Breakthrough Award, and have also been nominated for various other accolades.

Solo career[link]

In early 2009, after his last tour with The Rascals, Kane left the band to focus on a solo career. Inspired by a classic, smart 60s Mod theme he signed with Columbia Records^[2] and began recording his solo album with Dan Carey and Dan the Automator, who had previously worked with Gorillaz and Kasabian.^[3]

Kane's debut single, "Inhaler" was released on 22 November 2010, and he did a series of solo shows throughout November, as well as supporting The Courteeners at several shows in December. He then continued solo performances in January and February, before supporting Beady Eye at eight shows in March.^[4] Kane released another single, "Come Closer" on 20 February 2011, reaching #85 on the UK Singles Chart.^[5]

"Rearrange", the lead single for his debut album, was released on 27 March 2011 and reached #149 on the UK Singles Chart.^[6] The album, titled Colour of the Trap, was released on 9 May 2011.^[7][8] One track, "My Fantasy" features backing vocals from Noel Gallagher,^[9] while another, "Happenstance" is a duet between Kane and French actress Clémence Poésy.^[10] Half of the tracks on the album were co-written by Alex Turner, Kane's partner in The Last Shadow Puppets.

Kane supported Arctic Monkeys for two shows in Sheffield in June 2011. As well as being their support act on their Australian tour of January 2012. ^[11]

It was also announced on the 19th of October 2011 that Kane is to support Kasabian on their UK tour in December 2011.

Band members[link]

The live band include Ben Parsons, Phil Anderson, Jay Sharrock (whose father is Chris Sharrock, former The Icicle Works, The La's, Robbie Williams and Oasis (2008–2009) drummer and the current drummer in Beady Eye) and George Moran. Singer-songwriter, Eugene McGuinness was formerly a member. He left the band to continue with his own career.

• Jay Sharrock – drums
• Ben Parsons – keyboards
• Phill Anderson – bass guitar
• George Moran – rhythm guitar/vocals

Former Members

• Eugene McGuinness – vocals/rhythm guitar^[12]

Discography[link]

Note: This only includes artist's solo career, not other projects such as The Last Shadow Puppets or The Rascals.

Studio Albums[link]

EPs[link]

Singles[link]

References[link]

External links[link]

Wikimedia Commons has media related to: Miles Kane

• Official website
• Miles Kane on Twitter
• Miles Kane on Facebook
• Miles Kane.org Fansite
• Miles Kane Forum